69 So. 3d 523
La. Ct. App.2011Background
- Moore convicted of second degree murder after jury trial; life imprisonment without parole, probation, or suspension; DNA on a broken 2×4 board ties Moore to the scene.
- Murphy beaten at Palms Motel, 28 years old, life support later terminated; no forced entry found; Moore shared the room with Murphy.
- DNA testing shows Murphy's DNA on large board piece and Moore's DNA on the small piece; a third person's DNA detected on the small piece.
- Moore provided statements to police; Miranda advisements given; initial interview not in cuffs; he later refused to talk in Dallas; two police interviews occurred.
- Moore moved to suppress his August 11, 2006 statement claiming improper Miranda warnings and misled questioning; suppression denied; trial court ruled statements voluntary.
- Trial proceeded with DNA and other evidence presented; jury found Moore guilty as charged; sentence life imprisonment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence to convict | Moore argues no eyewitness; DNA on board with third-DNA; pants/shoes tested negative | Evidence fails to exclude reasonable hypotheses of innocence | Sufficient evidence supports conviction across direct/circumstantial evidence. |
| Exclusion of Moore's statement as involuntary | Miranda warnings given; not in custody; voluntary waiver | Miranda rights not properly honored; misleading interrogation | Statement properly admitted; not the product of coercion; no unambiguous request for counsel. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1979) (standard for sufficiency of evidence; rational juror could find guilt)
- State v. Charleston, 764 So.2d 672 (La.App.2d Cir. 2000) (circumstantial evidence standard; exclude reasonable hypotheses)
- Stansbury v. California, 511 U.S. 318 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1994) (custody assessment; freedom of action)
- Patterson v. Illinois, 487 U.S. 285 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1988) (waiver of rights sufficient for knowing/voluntary admission; no need to inform of specific charges)
- State v. Holmes, 5 So.3d 42 (La. 2009) (Miranda warnings; voluntary waiver; evidence of coercion)
- State v. Cooper, 839 So.2d 995 (La.App.2d Cir. 2003) (invoke right to counsel; unambiguous request required; continuance of questioning)
- Davis v. United States, 512 U.S. 452 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1994) (unambiguous invocation of right to counsel required)
- State v. Blank, 955 So.2d 90 (La. 2007) (custody and Miranda analysis; non-arrest scenario)